"Today's 33 is our 27." - Ivan Lendl explaining the Great Age Shift in tennis.

Go to page

Go to page

Hall of Fame

I've been saying this for years, that a huge age shift had taken place in tennis in this decade. The Great Age Shift. GAS. You heard it here first.

Which means - for example - that RF being 38 isn't nearly the big deal it would have been in the 90s or 80s. It is admirable and amazing but not THAT amazing.

It also means that we cannot moan too much about 23 year-olds not winning slams anymore, because it's a completely different ballgame in modern pro tennis, with guys playing their best tennis at around 30 - give or take a few years. Wawrinka and Anderson are just two examples.

In other words, 27-34 (roughly speaking) may have become the new peak/prime/shmeep as opposed to the past eras when it was quite clearly 20-25.

Players used to drop their form at around 27-29, then retire at 30 or 31, roughly speaking. Now they are kicking ass at 30, and doing very well or reasonably well at 35 even, which would have been very rare in past eras. Agassi, Newcombe and Connors were exceptions.

We need to finally acknowledge this age shift (as much as it may annoy some RF fans who have a fetish for agism and age-related excuses), which may even be much greater than Lendl suggested (off the cuff probably). We cannot glorify RF for being a top player at 38 the way we would have done in 1993. That's just a fact.

Nor can we mock young players for not slaying the Big 3 at age 21 - which would have been normal in 1991 when 21 year-olds killed the veterans regularly.

And another thing: this is the first time in the Open Era (or probably ever) that no player younger than 31 has a slam title!!! If that fact doesn't convince you of the Great Age Shift (GAS), then nothing will, and perhaps you are in denial?

Professional

I was talking about this yesterday actually on the forum. Federer winning at 37 does not surprise me at all, with his experience, fitness regime, diet, conditioning etc, it does not come as a surprise that he is still competing at the highest level.

Hall of Fame

Then how do you explain the Womans draw having more than half of the players under 25 in the 4th round? How do you explain 15 year old vs 21 year old defending champion? Why does this only apply to mens tennis? Why are young people doing great things in other sports? They are just making excuse for these losers so that ratings don't die.

Legend

I generally agree with you, OP. Federer’s form at 38 is very impressive, but probably only the equivalent of Connors being able to reach the later stages of slams in his early 30s. To match Connors’ run to the US Open semis aged 39, Federer would have to do the same aged 43 or something.

Hall of Fame

I've been saying this for years, that a huge age shift had taken place in tennis in this decade. The Great Age Shift. GAS. You heard it here first.

Which means - for example - that RF being 38 isn't nearly the big deal it would have been in the 90s or 80s. It is admirable and amazing but not THAT amazing.

It also means that we cannot moan too much about 23 year-olds not winning slams anymore, because it's a completely different ballgame in modern pro tennis, with guys playing their best tennis at around 30 - give or take a few years. Wawrinka and Anderson are just two examples.

In other words, 27-34 (roughly speaking) may have become the new peak/prime/shmeep as opposed to the past eras when it was quite clearly 20-25.

Players used to drop their form at around 27-29, then retire at 30 or 31, roughly speaking. Now they are kicking ass at 30, and doing very well or reasonably well at 35 even, which would have been very rare in past eras. Agassi, Newcombe and Connors were exceptions.

We need to finally acknowledge this age shift (as much as it may annoy some RF fans who have a fetish for agism and age-related excuses), which may even be much greater than Lendl suggested (off the cuff probably). We cannot glorify RF for being a top player at 38 the way we would have done in 1993. That's just a fact.

Nor can we mock young players for not slaying the Big 3 at age 21 - which would have been normal in 1991 when 21 year-olds killed the veterans regularly.

And another thing: this is the first time in the Open Era (or probably ever) that no player younger than 31 has a slam title!!! If that fact doesn't convince you of the Great Age Shift (GAS), then nothing will, and perhaps you are in denial?

Professional

Then how do you explain the Womans draw having more than half of the players under 25 in the 4th round? How do you explain 15 year old vs 21 year old defending champion? Why does this only apply to mens tennis? Why are young people doing great things in other sports? They are just making excuse for these losers so that ratings don't die.

Hall of Fame

Then how do you explain the Womans draw having more than half of the players under 25 in the 4th round? How do you explain 15 year old vs 21 year old defending champion? Why does this only apply to mens tennis? Why are young people doing great things in other sports? They are just making excuse for these losers so that ratings don't die.

Hall of Fame

I generally agree with you, OP. Federer’s form at 38 is very impressive, but probably only the equivalent of Connors being able to reach the later stages of slams in his early 30s. To match Connors’ run to the US Open semis aged 39, Federer would have to do the same aged 43 or something.

G.O.A.T.

I generally agree with you, OP. Federer’s form at 38 is very impressive, but probably only the equivalent of Connors being able to reach the later stages of slams in his early 30s. To match Connors’ run to the US Open semis aged 39, Federer would have to do the same aged 43 or something.

G.O.A.T.

I don’t believe there has been an age shift. The younger guys are just worse due to a backwards shift in training techniques. They all hit with wristy forehands that are great when the incoming ball is slow, but terrible for returning pace on the rise. The old guys that learned the game pre-poly have superior technique better for making clean contact.

The median age of ATP pros will return to the early 20’s within the next 3 years when the current crop of old guys finally fades away and we are left with the best of the worst generation in the modern era.

Hall of Fame

I don’t believe there has been an age shift. The younger guys are just worse due to a backwards shift in training techniques. They all hit with wristy forehands that are great when the incoming ball is slow, but terrible for returning pace on the rise. The old guys that learned the game pre-poly have superior technique better for making clean contact.

The median age of ATP pros will return to the early 20’s within the next 3 years when the current crop of old guys finally fades away and we are left with the best of the worst generation in the modern era.

Legend

Hall of Fame

So based on this (if true) I'm expecting lost gen to start peaking in their 30s after big 3 retire and win all the slams. If lost gen are succeeded by generation born in 2000s then this theory completely falls apart.

Man, other sports are other sports and women tennis is also kind of another sport. I have a book of physical training for tennis and in it they explain the difference in training between men and women. There is a big difference due to the format and the physical difference between men and women.

Hall of Fame

So based on this (if true) I'm expecting lost gen to start peaking in their 30s after big 3 retire and win all the slams. If lost gen are succeeded by generation born in 2000s then this theory completely falls apart.

Hall of Fame

Man, other sports are other sports and women tennis is also kind of another sport. I have a book of physical training for tennis and in it they explain the difference in training between men and women. There is a big difference due to the format and the physical difference between men and women.

Legend

I don’t believe there has been an age shift. The younger guys are just worse due to a backwards shift in training techniques. They all hit with wristy forehands that are great when the incoming ball is slow, but terrible for returning pace on the rise. The old guys that learned the game pre-poly have superior technique better for making clean contact.

The median age of ATP pros will return to the early 20’s within the next 3 years when the current crop of old guys finally fades away and we are left with the best of the worst generation in the modern era.

Semi-Pro

Like Ronaldo I’m football he is in great mid thirties as he has the use of medical science and nutrition. He is also one the best of all time and same goes for the big 3, they are so good plus taking advantage of all the health benefits these days as kept them at the top

Semi-Pro

You can’t compare sports. In which other sports do you do efforts between 1 and 20 seconds then have 25 seconds of rest then repeat ? And I’m not even talking about the size of the court. All these elements make tennis a very specific sport.

Hall of Fame

You can’t compare sports. In which other sports do you do efforts between 1 and 20 seconds then have 25 seconds of rest then repeat ? And I’m not even talking about the size of the court. All these elements make tennis a very specific sport.

I agree it’s not just a Big3 issue. It’s a whole generation of tennis players that suck compared to the guys that cane before them. I’m saying it’s not coincidence that the current guys in their early 30’s are part of the last generation to grow up with strokes designed to control the ball with synthetic gut.

Hall of Fame

I agree it’s not just a Big3 issue. It’s a whole generation of tennis players that suck compared to the guys that cane before them. I’m saying it’s not coincidence that the current guys in their early 30’s are part of the last generation to grow up with strokes designed to control the ball with synthetic gut.

Hall of Fame

We've managed to teach fans that weak eras exist (or at least we tried), so I'm pretty sure that GAS will eventually be accepted by everybody. It'll just take time, because people tend to dislike mysteries and change.